IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpgt/0502020.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

How Serious are Methodological Issues in Surveys? A Reexamination of the Clarence Thomas Polls^T

Author

Listed:
  • J. S. Armstrong

    (The Wharton School)

  • F. Collopy

    (The Weatherhead School of Management)

Abstract

Opinion polling procedures allow for reasonable inferences about attitude changes. We examined this contention using surveys about the nomination of Clarence Thomas. In this situation, prior theory allowed us to predict the direction of changes, surveys had been conducted by a number of organizations, and substantial information was available about the methodology used in the surveys. As a result we concluded that the deteriorating opinions of Thomas were real.

Suggested Citation

  • J. S. Armstrong & F. Collopy, 2005. "How Serious are Methodological Issues in Surveys? A Reexamination of the Clarence Thomas Polls^T," General Economics and Teaching 0502020, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0502020
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/get/papers/0502/0502020.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Armstrong, J. Scott & Buchanan, William, 1988. "Public opinion quarterly : William Buchanan, election predictions: An empirical assessment, 50 (1986) 222-227," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 4(1), pages 162-164.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Keywords

      surveys; methodology;

      JEL classification:

      • A - General Economics and Teaching

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpgt:0502020. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.